Hey thank you for the plug Mr. thompson,
Check out the latest thread on the Boomer! I do have 2vidio's
from the 4th (sorry no website yet guys) but if you send me your e-mail I will be glad to send them out to you ASAP. I will build a web as soon as I can get my buddy free to help me with it.
I will say the Boomer is an awsome Flat Land Wing.
I am currently flying it with a

Hitec Neon Radio
4MG Receiver
HS-55 servo's
110Mah 4 cell
this is no real special gear and it fly's fantastic.
Also please be carfull of building these wings too light as you
will loose to much penatration and thats not good if you can't reatain energy on a wing. (Too light is not good) that is why I made the W2 version.

Regard's, Mike Baker

Images

The Gambler will out perform an extended wing bug. I think they are equal in durability, maybe even an edge to the Gambler because of the glassed pod. Remember the spar on the Gambler is reinforced top and bottom with CF so it's basicly a composite spar - very durable.

I'm not familiar with the other planes on the list (other than the bug) but the Gambler is an S3021 airfoil with wing loading of 3.5-3.9 oz/sq. ft. That makes it quite a floater. I doubt you'll get wingloading like that from the flying wings in your list. The spinner may have some advantages in thermaling with the camber changing airfoil, but I'd bet it's wingloading is much higher. Really all of the planes you list are in a similar 'class' i.e. affordable, entry-level HLGs. If you already have a bug and know you like HLG, you might consider saving a few more dollars and stepping up to one of the $200 DLGs available.

So what is this chamber-changing business? excuse my ignorance... Is it just the fact that the ailerons are controlled by individual servos and thus the reflex can be adjusted on the fly?

Allan -

I think I like HLG and I do agree with you that eventually I should get into one of those higher end ships. However I am still relative new and I don't want to end up spending lots on something that I may end up crashing into pieces. The bug I have is not much of a trainner coz the hang time is so short. This is why I focus on these ships which as you say, are affordable entry-level HLGs.

Conclusions
1. These figures explain why my bug underperforms!
2. Seeker's performance looks best on paper
3. If getting red herring, it must be a EPS. No point getting EPP red herring coz it is not much better than my current bug
4. Extended bug if built correctly is very good too

Originally posted by dimple Miniweasel is certainly the second most economical option (after the bug) because I have all the electronics / radio already. It is durable which is a real plus but how easy is it to achieve that low weight?

Easy. Just leave the tape covering off Durability is still good, we fly that plane on the slope as well and it's holding up quite well. Penetration is not so hot of course, but honestly it really hangs in there in light lift and will make the most out of any thermals it encounters.

Now, that said, is it as much of a flat field performer as the other planes mentioned here? I have no idea, I don't know anything about the other planes mentioned in this thread. I suspect it's not as good, to be totally honest. It's a micro slope glider that can also be SALed and had fun with on a flat field, as opposed to a DLG/HLG that's designed primarily for that task.

Quote:

Do you fly the miniweasel on flat field regularly?

Not recently as the slope lift has been fairly decent, but I will be transitioning to primarily flat field flying soon as the summer wears on and the slope lift gets bad.

I think there's a bunch of good info in this thread, I like my miniWeasel but like I said it probably doesn't compare so well to the more focused HLG/DLGs mentioned. Works for me, FWIW. Your mileage may vary

Dimple,
There's at least two more factors that should also be considered.
The weights you used to calculate the loadings can vary. In one of the Gambler threads, one builder mentioned that his Gambler came out less than six ounces. My extended wing bug will be about 3.25-3.5 ounces - I've found some lightweight balsa. From what I've read, the Seeker design and kit is so optimized that most of them are coming out at 3.75 to 3.8 ounces. It's probably still best to go with the weights you used.

Launch height will be much higher with the spinner. The others mentioned are probably in the 50 to 70 foot range, while the spinner could top over 100 feet. If you throw an extended bug 50 feet up and the spinner 100 feet, you would probably get the longer no-lift flight from the spinner. This is further complicated by the fact that thermals are stronger at 100 feet than at 50.

Nothing is ever simple, but I think you can't go wrong with the Spinner, Gambler, or extended bug.

I agree with you completely. My calculations were just an attempt to simplify things for myself. Today I read an article on quiet flying and as the author suggests, the airfoil is the most important in DLG rather than the wing loading.

However the calculations do help because after seeing the results I do not intend to get a herring or miniweasel anymore, but I guess I have always been biased towards the more traditional plane anyway. Like you have suggested I have narrowed my choice to the spinner, gambler, and the seeker; or to build an extended bug.

I think I will definitely try the extended bug since I have the material around anyway. The monetary cost to me is virtually zero although I am a bit busy at work and I wanna fly more than cutting balsa to the exact shape. I wish the bug has a kit... Don't get me wrong, I like building, but I like flying more when time is limited. Also I do think I will grow out of even an extended bug reasonably quickly, since as you pointout the launch height for the bug is lower and hence dead air time is shorter. I suspect the extended wing bug has the lowest performance c.f. the rest of the remainder planes. Of course it will remain good as a fly any time no fear of trashing type of plane.

I will most likely end up buying one of the 3 commercial planes, as a transition to the more high end ones like taboo.

It seems that the spinner is the most durable, has the highest launch height, but also the most expensive

The gambler and seeker probably has similar performance, price and durability?

I am deciding between two options. For approx US$140 I can (a) buy a spinner only or (b) Use the same money to get a seeker and the plan for gambler. There will still be money left for some balsa / raw material to build the gambler.

It appears that option (b) is a more economical choice, but if spinner is definitely going to outperform a gambler / seeker by a abig margin, I will probably take option (a) - one durable plane of higher performance is better than 2 of less durability and ??less performance.

Can some one please quote some dead air time / launch height for the spinner, seeker and the gambler?

Sorry I meant to say that you couldn't go wrong with the seeker, gambler , or extended bug.
Dead air time isn't thermalling performance. I'd go with option b, although the Gambler is more for a novice than the Seeker.
After you have gained experience, durability won't be so necessary and you can go for a dlg like the Janco Avenger ($250) or even the Taboo, XP-3.

My Seeker (3.6oz) launches quite a bit higher than my Bug (3oz). Dead air times for the Seeker are around 40sec versus the Bugs 30sec or so. As compared to the Bug, the Seeker excels in penetration and its ability to range out. Also seems more responsive to lift.

The Seeker does penetrate quite well (better than other built up floaters I have seen) and I have flown mine in pretty windy conditions with success. One note about the Seeker though - it is designed for specific equipment so if you already have gear that you plan to use make sure it will fit. I can tell you a Hitec 555 won't do the job and if you're servos are too thick you'll also be out of luck as there's no modifying the pod.

Thanks all for the reply. After so much deliberation I think I will go with option (b). I am sure spinner is a good plane but I am happy to give it a skip for now. It is the most expensive and there is no guarantee it will work as well on flat field as the other planes. Thank you John for clarifying your opinion. I do find it a bit odd at first when you put spinner on your suggested list.

Anyway I will spend the $140 odd dollar I have on a gambler and some new hs 50 servos. I originally intended to get the seeker as well but I think I will get the servos first this time round since I only have some hs 55 left at the moment and they are a bit heavy. Next time I upgrade I will certainly put seeker on top of the list, but I am hoping I can go directly to a taboo xl.....

BTW, the reason I chose gambler over seeker was because the gambler came with a plan, and is within my ability to rebuild if I damage it because it is built up. I admire the seeker for its lightness and its good reputation but I am not sure if I am capable of repairing it if I damage it because it is foam. My good old foamie sloper was EPP reinforced with strapping tape and never really needed repairs. All up the seeker is also more expensive, because not only will I get some new servos I will probably need to get a new rx as well to fit.

I will certainly reconsider a seeker once my skills are better and I have saved up some more.. may be in 1/2 years' time?

The answer.... Either buy a lot of aircraft, or find a field with a bunch of flyers so you can see them fly or try them out.

I am very intrigued by wood also. It's great to be able to get the plans out and rebuild something back to perfect.

On the other hand an airfoil without sags between the ribs must account for something (foam or sheeted, or glass whatever).

I had a hard time accepting foam, but after absolutely abusing both a Seeker and a Red Herring, I have come to the conclusion that a really light foam aircraft doesn't carry enough inertia to easily damage itself. I have a few little dings and dents on the leading edge, but I have not noticed any degradation in flight characteristics. They both still fly close to a 1 minute dead air hang time, and they both still catch lots of thermals.